Study for Cyberpeace

LATEST UPDATE:

The Myth of Cyberwar: Bringing War in Cyberspace Back Down to Earth
by Erik Gartzke

Abstract:

Cyberwar has been described as a revolution in military affairs, a transformation of
technology and doctrine capable of overturning the prevailing world order. This
characterization of the threat from cyberwar, however, reflects a common tendency to conflate
means and ends; studying what could happen in cyberspace (or anywhere else) makes little sense
without considering how conflict over the internet is going to realize objectives commonly
addressed by terrestrial warfare. To supplant established modes of conflict, cyberwar must be
capable of furthering the political ends to which force or threats of force are commonly
applied, something that in major respects cyberwar fails to do. As such, conflict over the
internet is much more likely to serve as an adjunct to, rather than a substitute for, existing
modes of terrestrial force. Indeed, rather than threatening existing political hierarchies,
cyberwar is much more likely to simply augment the advantages of status quo powers.

NOTE: I was ackknowledged by the author Professor Gartzke because I have written a review for
his paper and he included my notes into the paper in the International Security.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A Non-Attribution-Dilemma and its Impact on Legal Regulation of Cyberwar
Michael Niekamp and Florian Grunert

Abstract:

The potential impossibility of attribution in cyberspace causes at least three challenges for
international politics. This paper analyses the systematic role of the non-attribution-problem
with regard to the definition of cyberwar, its impact on legal regulation and the strategy of
"deterrence through a threat of retaliation". Firstly we provide a conceptual specification
of non-attribution. Secondly, referring to a classical definition of war and a sound principle of self-defense, we provide a logical clarification of these
terms for cases of non-attribution and their impact to define and classify "cyberwar".
Afterwards we argue that any attempt to rational legal regulation under non-attribution will
lead into a serious dilemma, which consists either in a reductio ad absurdum of the
category of war and the impossibility of a sound principle of self-defense or the
indistinguishability of a state of regulation and anarchy. However, the existence of this
non-attribution-problem has no impact on the possibility of rational "deterrence through a
threat of retaliation", which in turn might lead to a complete prudential dilemma.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This model will help to understand the problems in cyberspace DOWNLOAD(PDF)